Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the decision was made to put armour on the Jackal M-WMIK vehicle; whether all the M-WMIK vehicles have been armoured; whether any M-WMIK vehicles have been armoured after they were manufactured or delivered to theatre; and how much armouring each vehicle has cost.

Bob Ainsworth: The requirement to protect JACKAL was a Key User Requirement and was stated within the Business Case, in May 2007. All vehicles delivered to the operational theatre are fitted with armour (during production), while some vehicles within the UK training fleet are not, but will be fitted retrospectively. The armour kit costs £83,000 per vehicle installation.

Flood Control

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will encourage localised measurement of rainfall to present more accurate information on potential flooding.

Phil Woolas: The Environment Agency maintains a network of 750 telemetered rain-gauges which feed data directly into computer models to forecast river levels, using the national flood forecasting system (NFFS). The Environment Agency is about to gain access to a further 110 telemetered rain-gauges that are owned by the Met Office The Environment Agency also maintains a network of 2,250 rain-gauges across England and Wales that are monitored on a daily basis and which are used in a planning capacity to establish potential flood risk.
	Due to the limitations of measuring rainfall at fixed point locations, spatial data on actual and forecast rainfall is provided by a network of weather radars (which measure rainfall to a resolution up to 1 sq km), and by the Met Office's weather forecasting models. The Environment Agency has evaluated each area with a flood risk to ensure that each is served with information from an appropriate number of rain-gauges or data from weather radar. Where gaps are identified, then improvements in rain-gauge coverage (and/or weather radar) are under way.

Departmental ICT

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 22 February 2008,  Official Report, column 1049W, on departmental ICT, how many missing or stolen  (a) laptops and  (b) personal digital assistants have been replaced by his Department; and at what cost.

Gerry Sutcliffe: All of the PDA's lost or stolen since 2001 have been replaced. The value of each is not recorded but as a guide the current price of a PDA is 159. All of the laptops were replaced by re-allocating existing equipment.

Alcoholic Drinks: Public Order Offences

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were  (a) cautioned,  (b) prosecuted and  (c) given a penalty notice for disorder for failing to comply with a request from police (i) not to consume alcohol in an alcohol consumption designated public place and (ii) for failing to surrender alcohol in their possession in each of the last 10 years.

Vernon Coaker: The number of persons issued with a caution, penalty notice for disorder (PND), and proceeded against at magistrates courts for failing to comply with a request from police not to consume alcohol in an alcohol consumption designated public place, and for failing to surrender alcohol in their possession in England and Wales for 2006 can be viewed in the following tables.
	
		
			  Number of persons issued with a caution, and proceeded against at magistrates courts for certain alcohol offences in England and Wales for the year 2006( 1,2,3) 
			   2006 
			  Offence description  Proceeded against  Cautions( 4) 
			 Failure to comply with a requirement by a constable re: the consumption of alcohol in a designated public place 101 13 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statutes: Failure to comply with a requirement by a constable re: the consumption of alcohol in a designated public place Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001S.12(2)(a) and (4) (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (4) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and final warnings. Reprimands and final warnings are included in the above data.  Source: Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	
		
			  Number of persons issued with a penalty notice for disorder for the offence Consumption of alcohol in public place in England and Wales for the year 2006( 1,2,3,4) 
			   Consumption of alcohol  in public place 
			 2006 1,061 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statute: Consume alcohol in designated public place, contrary to requirement by constable not to do so. S.12 Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (3) The above PND offence also covers the offence Fail to surrender intoxicating liquor to constable (4) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many  (a) on premises and  (b) off premises licences were (i) suspended and (ii) revoked for selling alcohol to people under the age of 18 years in each of the last five years, broken down by police area.

Jacqui Smith: This information is not held centrally.
	Prior to the implementation of the Licensing Act 2003 which came into force on 25 November 2005, data on the number of liquor licences issued under the Licensing Act 1964 (the 1964 Act) in England and Wales was collected by petty sessional divisions (magistrates courts areas), on a three yearly basis. The previous set of data relating to the 1964 Act covered the triennial renewal process when 273 on-licensed and 81 off-licensed premises had their licences revoked in England and Wales between July 2003 and June 2004. This data does not indicate the reason for revocation which could include premises having simply ceased trading. This data is not available broken down by police area.
	The first DCMS Statistical Bulletin on Alcohol, Entertainment and Late Night Refreshment, under the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003, was published on 8 November 2007. This shows that, between April 2006 and March 2007, there were 675 completed reviews which resulted in 92 licences being revoked and 91 being suspended (based upon a 85 per cent. response rate from licensing authorities). The data does not indicate the reason for revocation or suspension, nor by type of licensed premises. Licences may be revoked on review for one or more reasons relating to the four licensing objectives, including sales of alcohol to children.
	There were also 37 personal licences revoked, suspended or declared forfeit by the courts in 2006-07 (80 per cent. response rate). The loss of personal licence could relate to conviction for any one of a number of relevant offences, including the sale of alcohol to children.

Asylum: Children

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the report of the Children's Commissioner, published on 3 March 2008, insofar as it relates to unaccompanied asylum-seeking children; whether she plans to take steps to address such issues; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: holding answer 31 March 2008
	The UK Border Agency is carefully considering the report and, before responding formally to each of the recommendations, have met representatives of the Children's Commissioner on 3 April. Work to improve the arrangements for unaccompanied asylum seeking children has already addressed a number of the report's recommendations.

British Nationality: Armed Forces

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many non-British citizens who served with British services in  (a) Iraq,  (b) Afghanistan and  (c) other military campaigns have subsequently (i) applied for British citizenship, (ii) been granted and (iii) not been granted British citizenship.

Liam Byrne: This information is not available, as the details requested are not supplied by the applicant, when making an application for British citizenship.

Detection Rates

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the crime detection rate in  (a) each police force and  (b) England and Wales was in each year since 1997.

Vernon Coaker: The information requested is given in the following table.
	The non-sanction detections that contribute to the overall detection rate have fallen in recent years reflecting a significant shift by many police forces away from recording detections of crime where no further action is taken. For this reason overall detection rates over time are not fully comparable. From 1 April 2007 the rules governing recording of non-sanction detections were revised to reduce the scope within which they can be claimed to a very limited set of circumstances.
	
		
			  Detection rates for all recorded offences by police force area, 1997 to 2006-07 
			  Police force area  1997  1998-99( 1)  1999-2000( 2)  2000-01  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 Avon and Somerset 26 24 22 21 14 15 15 17 23 24 
			 Bedfordshire 35 33 25 27 25 26 23 28 25 22 
			 British Transport Police n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 15 16 17 20 24 
			 Cambridgeshire 27 29 25 24 22 22 23 23 27 25 
			 Cheshire 36 37 31 30 26 26 27 26 27 27 
			 Cleveland 25 23 22 21 20 23 21 24 30 31 
			 Cumbria 40 44 39 34 32 31 32 30 35 36 
			 Derbyshire 25 31 28 26 25 26 25 28 27 26 
			 Devon and Cornwall 32 36 35 34 32 29 29 30 28 27 
			 Dorset 29 31 26 25 27 25 26 28 30 30 
			 Durham 31 33 32 34 33 34 29 29 27 30 
			 Dyfed-Powys 61 69 65 63 64 68 47 43 45 45 
			 Essex 27 29 30 26 26 27 28 27 31 33 
			 Gloucestershire 24 31 31 32 30 29 28 27 32 33 
			 Greater Manchester 20 25 23 22 21 22 22 23 25 25 
			 Gwent 51 55 53 57 55 48 45 42 36 33 
			 Hampshire 30 35 32 29 29 30 27 28 24 23 
			 Hertfordshire 32 34 27 24 24 23 25 29 26 29 
			 Humberside 20 22 19 21 20 20 19 20 23 25 
			 Kent 31 34 33 28 28 28 25 23 26 26 
			 Lancashire 29 34 29 27 26 27 27 30 32 35 
			 Leicestershire 34 34 30 28 28 27 22 25 30 28 
			 Lincolnshire 48 40 28 25 27 23 22 25 26 28 
			 London, City of 26 33 32 27 34 36 33 36 43 39 
			 Merseyside 31 31 26 28 24 25 27 30 28 29 
			 Metropolitan Police 26 22 16 15 14 14 15 21 24 21 
			 Norfolk 37 37 30 26 25 24 26 28 31 30 
			 Northamptonshire 35 33 33 33 31 28 28 29 25 26 
			 Northumbria 26 30 31 31 31 31 30 29 35 40 
			 North Wales 34 43 36 31 28 29 33 42 43 48 
			 North Yorkshire 26 33 31 30 26 26 28 35 35 33 
			 Nottinghamshire 28 25 21 20 18 16 18 20 22 23 
			 South Wales 36 39 31 31 33 29 29 29 26 25 
			 South Yorkshire 29 32 25 25 23 21 24 26 27 26 
			 Staffordshire 35 32 22 23 20 31 33 35 35 35 
			 Suffolk 37 41 36 35 33 34 33 32 30 31 
			 Surrey 33 40 32 28 25 22 22 26 25 30 
			 Sussex 26 25 25 23 25 24 24 25 30 31 
			 Thames Valley 24 25 20 22 24 25 23 26 28 25 
			 Warwickshire 27 26 22 22 25 26 25 27 25 27 
			 West Mercia 28 34 29 28 28 33 31 34 34 34 
			 West Midlands 24 30 27 28 29 26 25 23 26 27 
			 West Yorkshire 27 27 25 23 19 20 20 25 28 29 
			 Wiltshire 32 38 33 29 30 28 28 29 32 26 
			
			 England and Wales 28 29 25 24 22 24 23 26 27 27 
			 n/a = not available (1) The number of crimes detected In that financial year using the expanded coverage and revised counting rules which came Into effect on 1 April 1998. (2) New instructions which clarified the rules for detecting crime were Introduced on 1 April 1999.  Note: It should be noted that non-sanction detections that contribute to the overall detection rate have fallen In recent years reflecting a significant shift by many police forces away from recording detections of crime where no further action is taken. For this reason overall detection rates over time are not fully comparable. From 1 April 2007 the rules governing recording of non-sanction detections were revised to reduce the scope within which they can be claimed to a very limited set of circumstances.

Immigration

Peter Lilley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the evidential basis is of her estimate that the annual inflow of immigrants contributes £6 billion to the economy; and what estimate she has made of the annual expenditure of immigrants on goods and services, including repatriated earnings.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 21 April 2008
	The evidential basis for the impact of migration on trend economic growth is set out in the joint Home Office—DWP submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs The economic and fiscal impact of immigration.
	According to official data from the Office for National Statistics, migration added around 0.5 percentage points per annum to growth in the working age population between mid 2001 and mid 2006, and, therefore to overall trend output growth. On this basis, the contribution of migration to economic growth in 2006 would have been some £6 billion.
	The trend growth framework employed by the Treasury, and the impact of migration on the trend growth projection, is set out in Trend growth: new evidence and prospects, available at:
	http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/1/pbr06_trendgrowth_345.pdf.
	The information requested on expenditure and remittances falls within the responsibility of the Office for National Statistics. No statistics are collected on expenditure by immigrants on goods and services. The available information on remittance payments was laid out in a letter from the National Statistician to Lord Lament of Lerwick on 19 November 2007,  Official Report, House of Lords, columns WA47-48, in answer to his parliamentary question of that date, to which I refer the hon. Member.

Police: Manpower

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers there were per notifiable offence in England in each year since 1997; and if she will make a statement.

Tony McNulty: The information requested is given in the following tables.
	
		
			  Table 1: Total offences per officer for 1997 
			  Police force area  Number 
			 Avon and Somerset 48 
			 Bedfordshire 44 
			 Cambridgeshire 47 
			 Cheshire 30 
			 Cleveland 43 
			 Cumbria 31 
			 Derbyshire 42 
			 Devon and Cornwall 32 
			 Dorset 34 
			 Durham 32 
			 Essex 31 
			 Gloucestershire 43 
			 Greater Manchester 44 
			 Hampshire 36 
			 Hertfordshire 29 
			 Humberside 60 
			 Kent 38 
			 Lancashire 37 
			 Leicestershire 41 
			 Lincolnshire 36 
			 London, City of 6 
			 Merseyside 30 
			 Metropolitan Police 30 
			 Norfolk 37 
			 Northamptonshire 46 
			 Northumbria 37 
			 North Yorkshire 37 
			 Nottinghamshire 55 
			 South Yorkshire 41 
			 Staffordshire 39 
			 Suffolk 30 
			 Surrey 24 
			 Sussex 37 
			 Thames valley 42 
			 Warwickshire 39 
			 West Mercia 38 
			 West Midlands 39 
			 West Yorkshire 47 
			 Wiltshire 29 
			 England 37 
			  Note: Recorded crime statistics were collected on a calendar year basis up to 1997 and thereafter on a financial year basis. Therefore, these figures are not comparable with those for later years. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Total offences per officer for 1998-99 to 2001-02 
			  Police force area  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02 
			 Avon and Somerset 50 50 50 57 
			 Bedfordshire 47 52 48 49 
			 Cambridgeshire 53 56 50 51 
			 Cheshire 31 32 32 34 
			 Cleveland 47 46 46 49 
			 Cumbria 36 35 31 34 
			 Derbyshire 48 48 45 49 
			 Devon and Cornwall 38 39 35 33 
			 Dorset 41 40 37 40 
			 Durham 32 31 28 32 
			 Essex 33 37 37 38 
			 Gloucestershire 44 46 43 43 
			 Greater Manchester 53 55 53 53 
			 Hampshire 37 40 39 39 
			 Hertfordshire 29 30 33 37 
			 Humberside 66 63 58 57 
			 Kent 40 39 39 36 
			 Lancashire 36 34 36 42 
			 Leicestershire 47 47 43 42 
			 Lincolnshire 41 41 37 42 
			 London, City of 9 11 12 13 
			 Merseyside 33 36 35 37 
			 Metropolitan Police 36 41 40 40 
			 Norfolk 41 43 40 40 
			 Northamptonshire 58 55 49 50 
			 Northumbria 39 38 35 35 
			 North Yorkshire 41 42 40 42 
			 Nottinghamshire 61 62 61 68 
			 South Yorkshire 42 42 39 42 
			 Staffordshire 41 46 49 55 
			 Suffolk 34 38 39 42 
			 Surrey 26 26 31 31 
			 Sussex 46 48 48 47 
			 Thames Valley 47 51 51 52 
			 Warwickshire 42 43 40 44 
			 West Mercia 40 45 40 51 
			 West Midlands 43 51 49 48 
			 West Yorkshire 55 54 54 61 
			 Wiltshire 33 34 33 33 
			 England 41 44 42 44 
			  Notes: 1. The coverage was extended and counting rules revised from 1989-99. Figures from that date are not directly comparable with those for 1997 and earlier. 2. The data in this table is prior to the introduction of the National Crime Recording standard. These figures are not directly comparable with those for later. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 3: Total offences per officer for 2002-03 to 2006-07 
			  Police force area  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 Avon and Somerset 55 48 48 46 48 
			 Bedfordshire 55 53 48 50 48 
			 Cambridgeshire 61 57 53 47 50 
			 Cheshire 40 42 41 44 41 
			 Cleveland 47 44 41 43 40 
			 Cumbria 33 32 35 35 31 
			 Derbyshire 52 48 41 40 40 
			 Devon and Cornwall 41 40 40 36 36 
			 Dorset 44 44 40 40 37 
			 Durham 31 29 27 31 32 
			 Essex 46 47 42 40 39 
			 Gloucestershire 45 45 41 41 40 
			 Greater Manchester 52 46 40 41 42 
			 Hampshire 42 48 46 47 48 
			 Hertfordshire 44 46 46 45 42 
			 Humberside 63 64 56 52 51 
			 Kent 37 38 38 41 40 
			 Lancashire 39 43 43 40 38 
			 Leicestershire 45 42 42 41 42 
			 Lincolnshire 51 49 48 47 45 
			 London, City of 12 11 10 10 9 
			 Merseyside 40 41 40 41 35 
			 Metropolitan Police 39 36 33 32 30 
			 Norfolk 48 46 43 42 40 
			 Northamptonshire 61 63 58 52 52 
			 Northumbria 42 39 35 33 33 
			 North Yorkshire 47 47 40 36 33 
			 Nottinghamshire 67 64 57 56 57 
			 South Yorkshire 48 43 43 50 49 
			 Staffordshire 49 48 44 46 46 
			 Suffolk 40 41 40 41 38 
			 Surrey 36 38 37 36 39 
			 Sussex 44 44 46 44 43 
			 Thames Valley 54 52 50 48 50 
			 Warwickshire 44 45 43 42 43 
			 West Mercia 47 45 40 36 34 
			 West Midlands 45 43 36 36 34 
			 West Yorkshire 64 62 47 46 44 
			 Wiltshire 38 35 33 35 37 
			 England 45 44 40 40 38 
			  Note: The data in this table takes account of the introduction of the National Crime Recording standard in April 2002. These figures are therefore not directly comparable with those for earlier years.

Adjudicator's Office: Finance

Graham Stuart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the annual budget of the Adjudicators Office is; and if he will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: In 2006-07 the cost of the Adjudicator's Office was £2.48 million. This figure was given in written evidence to the Treasury Committee on 15 January 2008 by Mr. Simon Oakes the head of the Adjudicator's Office. The figure includes an apportionment for accommodation and other services provided directly by HMRC, and is therefore higher than the £1.99 million quoted in the annual report for 2006-07.

Equitable Life

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much was spent producing the report of the Equitable Life Enquiry.

Angela Eagle: I refer the hon. Member to HM Treasury's Resource Accounts 2003-04 for the total cost of Lord Penrose's inquiry into Equitable Life.

Income Tax: Tax Evasion

Stephen Hesford: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many  (a) cases of and  (b) prosecutions for income tax evasion there have been since 2001.

Jane Kennedy: Since the creation of the RCPO and HMRC in 2005, 863 cases of direct tax and VAT evasion have been successfully prosecuted and a further 1361 settled under Civil Investigation of Fraud proceedings. Separate figures for income tax evasion are not available. Cases of less serious income tax evasion are resolved through enquiries, but HMRC does not keep records of this.
	Prosecutions for income tax evasion prior to April 2005 were carried out by the former Inland Revenue. In total, there were 76 successful direct tax prosecutions between 2001 and 2005.
	Details of these are published in the IR annual reports.

Offenders: Cost of Punishment

Nick Palmer: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will give consideration to charging offenders for the cost of their punishment.

David Hanson: The 1952 Prison Act requires all expenses incurred in the maintenance of prisons and prisoners to be met from public funds.
	The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 enables the confiscation of criminally acquired assets. Courts frequently impose compensation orders against defendants under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
	In this way prisoners who have funds can be made to contribute directly towards the costs of the criminal justice process, including those costs incurred in their imprisonment.
	We are currently looking at how the work and behaviour of prisoners can be better kinked to regime they are under in prison through a prisoner compact. I will be publishing proposals on this shortly.

Miscarriages of Justice: Compensation

David Tredinnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what provision there is for appeal against refusal of compensation for wrongful conviction, following the abolition of the discretionary scheme in November 2006.

Maria Eagle: Applicants who are refused eligibility for compensation under section 133 of the criminal Justice Act 1988 may make written representations to the Secretary of State if they believe that he did not take into account evidence which they had provided when reaching his decision to refuse their application, or if they have fresh evidence. Alternatively it is always open to the applicant to seek leave to judicially review the decision.

Prisons: Employment

Rudi Vis: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what rules are in place governing the employment of prisoners by external companies.

Maria Eagle: The Prison Service has a significant number of contracts and contacts with the private sector that lead to prisoners undertaking work or training within prisons but these do not create legally recognised employee/employer relationships and the prisoners are always under the governors overall management and supervision.

Children in Care: Missing Persons

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children in care were reported missing in each of the last 10 years.

Kevin Brennan: Information on the number of children looked after by English local authorities who were reported as missing in each of the years ending 31 March 2003 to 2007 is shown in the following table 1. Where a child was reported missing from his or her agreed placement on more than one occasion during the same year, he or she has been counted only once.
	
		
			  Table 1: Children looked after who were reported missing during the years ending 31 March 2003 to 2007( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) —England 
			  Number 
			   2003( 5)  2004( 6)  2005( 6)  2006( 6)  2007( 6) 
			 Children looked after who were reported as missing from their placement(1, 2, 3, 4) 1,200 830 970 1,000 1,100 
			 (1) Source: SSDA903 return on children looked after. (2) Children looked after at any time during the year ending 31 March. (3) Figures exclude children looked after under an agreed series of short term placements. (4) A child is recorded with a missing placement if he/she is absent for more than 24 hours from his/her agreed placement. Children who are missing from care are categorised in three types of missing placements: (a) In Refuge for children at risk, as defined in Section 51 of Children Act 1989, (b) Whereabouts of young people know to social services (but not in refuge) excluding agreed absences from placement such as holidays or planned breaks, (c) Whereabouts unknown. (5) Figures are taken from the SSDA903 one-third sample survey. (6) Figures are taken from the SSDA903 return which since 2004 covered all looked after children. (7) Historical figures may differ from older publications. This is mainly due to the implementation of amendments and corrections sent by some local authorities after the publication date of previous materials. (8) To maintain the confidentiality of each individual child, data at national level are rounded to the nearest 100 if they exceed 1,000 or to the nearest 10 otherwise.

Children: Day Care

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of child care  (a) places and  (b) providers were (i) maintained, (ii) private, (iii) voluntary and (iv) independent in (A) Basingstoke constituency, (B) Hampshire and (C) England at the latest date for which figures are available.

Beverley Hughes: The information is not available in the form requested.
	Since 2003, Ofsted has been responsible for the registration and inspection of child care providers. The tables show the number of providers and places registered with Ofsted at 31 March 2007 for Hampshire local authority and England.
	
		
			  Table 1: Number of registered child care providers and places in Hampshire, position at 31 March 2007 
			   Child minders  Full day care  Out of school day care 
			 Providers 2,500 300 200 
			 Places 12,000 14,200 9,600 
			  Notes: 1. Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10 if under 100, and to the nearest 100 if over 100. 2. Excludes the number of child care places in sessional day care and creche day care.  Source: Ofsted 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2 : Number of registered child care providers and places in  England , position at 31 March 2007 
			   Child minders  Full day care  Out of school day care 
			 Providers 69,900 13,800 10,600 
			 Places 317,700 598,700 365,400 
			  Notes: 1. Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10 if under 100, and to the nearest 100 if over 100. 2. Excludes the number of child care places in sessional day care and creche day care.  Source: Ofsted 
		
	
	Data from the 2006 Childcare and Early Years Providers Survey on the number and proportion of child care places in England by the type of ownership is shown in the following table. Data is not available at a local authority level.
	
		
			  Table 3: Number of Ofsted registered places in England, by ownership, 2006 
			   Full day care  Full day care in children's centres  Sessional  After school clubs  Holiday clubs 
			  Private, voluntary and independent  (Number) 477,900 14,300 265,700 200,500 181,200 
			 Private 379,400 7,000 83,000 90,100 97,500 
			 Voluntary 99,700 7,400 183,500 110,700 83,600 
			  Maintained 54,300 21,900 12,800 56,300 71,200 
			 Local authority 30,600 18,800 9,600 31,400 56,700 
			 School/college 24,000 3,300 3,200 25,300 14,500 
			 Other 14,500 1,700 700 3,500 12,400 
			   
			  Private, voluntary and independent  (Percentage) 88 (1)40 95 77 69 
			 Private 70 19 30 35 37 
			 Voluntary 18 (1)20 66 43 32 
			  Maintained 10 58 5 22 27 
			 Local authority 6 50 3 12 21 
			 School/college 4 (1)9 1 10 5 
			 Other 3 (1)4 <0.5 1 5 
			 (1) Low base size, figures should be treated as an indicative guide only. 
		
	
	The following table shows the number and proportion of child care providers in England by the type of ownership, from the 2006 Childcare and Early Years Providers Survey. Data is not available at a local authority level.
	
		
			  Table 4: Ownership of child care providers in England, 2006 
			   Full day care  Full day care in children's centres  Sessional  After school clubs  Holiday clubs 
			  Private, voluntary or independent (Number) 11,300 550 9,300 5,900 4,600 
			 Private 8,300 400 2,700 3,400 2,300 
			 Voluntary 3,000 150 6,600 2,500 2,300 
			  Maintained 1,300 200 400 1,600 1,500 
			 Local authority 700 150 300 800 1,200 
			 School/college 600 50 100 800 300 
			 Other 300 50 (1)— 100 300 
			   
			  Private, voluntary or independent (Percentage) 89 36 96 77 72 
			 Private 65 17 27 33 36 
			 Voluntary 24 20 68 44 36 
			  Maintained 10 57 5 22 25 
			 Local authority 5 50 4 11 19 
			 School/college 5 8 1 11 5 
			 Other 2 6 <0.5 1 4 
			 (1) Fewer than 50 providers; data has not been included due to too small a base size.

Departmental Public Expenditure

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the  (a) most recent annual budget,  (b) purpose and  (c) staff complement is of each of his Department's (i) advisory bodies, (ii) tribunals and (iii) corporations.

Kevin Brennan: The following answer outlines the  (a) most recent annual budget,  (b) purpose and  (c) staff complement of the each of the Department's (i) advisory bodies, (ii) corporations and (iii) tribunals.
	 (i)  Advisory Bodies
	 Independent Advisory Group on Teenage Pregnancy
	(a) The annual net budget is £0.4 million.
	(b) The Independent Advisory Group on Teenage Pregnancy provides advice to Government and monitors the success of its strategy towards reducing the rate of teenage conceptions, with the specific aim of halving the rate of conceptions among under 18s by 2010, and increasing the participation of teenage parents in education, employment and training to reduce risk of their long-term social exclusion.
	(c) The body does not employ any staff.
	 Teachers' TV board of governors
	(a) Net annual budget is £0.2 million.
	(b) The Board provides open accountability about the plans and performance of Teachers TV to the channel's audience, stakeholders and to the public. The Board upholds the editorial independence of Teachers TV; ensures that the channel supplier adopts the best practices of a UK public service broadcaster; incentivises the supplier to fulfil the Departments strategic aims; holds the supplier to account for the public funds it receives via an annual performance review; monitors the contractual relationship with the supplier and ensures that Teachers TV develops so that it meets the needs of its audience.
	(c) The board currently employs 1.9 Staff FTE.
	 Children's Plan Expert Group
	(a) Net annual budget is £0.1 million.
	(b) There are three expert groups (ages 0-7, 8-13, and 14-19) whose remit will be to look at services and policies affecting children, young people and families and to make recommendations to the Secretary of State on how best to deliver his long-term objectives to:
	Improve the health and well-being of children and young people
	Safeguard the young and vulnerable
	Close the gap in educational achievement between those from disadvantaged backgrounds and their peers
	'Raise our game' on raising standards
	Increase post-16 participation and attainment
	Increase the number of children and young people on the path to success
	(c) There were five staff employed for three months of the year
	 Information Standards Board
	(a) Net annual budget for £0.01 million.
	(b) The Information Standards Board (ISB) for education, skills and children's services in England is the system-wide authority for all information and data standards. Its mission is to facilitate information sharing across the system; agree information standards to aid front line delivery; improve efficiency, reduce costs and minimise bureaucracy. The ISB is designated as an Internal Advisory Committee, but has ministerial authority to make recommendations and approve decisions on behalf of the system.
	(c) The board does not employ staff
	 Talent Taskforce
	(a) The net annual budget is £1.84 million.
	(b) The Talent and Enterprise Taskforce is based in the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) but reports through to the cross-government Talent and Enterprise Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister underlining his personal commitment to the talent agenda. Central to the role of the Taskforce is promoting the imperative to unlock talent. The projects we undertake should aim to provide vehicles to communicate and bring that narrative alive. There is already a great wealth of constructive activity happening. The Taskforce aim is to recognise and build on that. Though based in Government, the Taskforce is outward facing. Our goal is to engage a wide range of influential networks, organizations and individuals across the educational, business, community and voluntary sectors and to add value,
	(c) The taskforce currently employs five Staff FTE
	 National Council for Educational Excellence
	(a) The net annual budget is £0.03 million.
	(b) The National Council for Educational Excellence (NCEE) has a remit to provide advice to the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families about strategy and measures to achieve world-class education performance for all children and young people from birth to age 19.
	The Council is focused on providing advice and mobilising all sectors to provide the support to increase standards. Council members will act as advocates and champions to transform expectations and aspirations for the education system, and to rally the teaching profession, businesses, the third sector, universities and colleges, schools, and parents to raise standards year on year.
	(c) The council employs four staff.
	 Ministerial Taskforce for Home Access to Technology for Children
	(a) The taskforce does not have a dedicated budget.
	(b) In January 2007 Minister of State Jim Knight announced the setting up of a Home Access taskforce to advise Government of possible solutions for universal home access for all school age children in England. Representatives on the taskforce come from industry, the third sector and teaching profession. Working together in partnership with industry and the third sector is the only way we can hope to deliver and sustain universal access.
	(c) The taskforce does not employ any staff.
	 (ii)  Corporations
	 General Teachers Council of England
	(a) Net annual budget of £0.7 million.
	(b) The General Teaching Council for England is the independent professional body for teaching in England.
	It works for children, through teachers, in the interests of the public. It is committed to making sure young people have the best possible standards of learning and achievement.
	It keeps a register of qualified teachers in England and sets out and enforces standards for the teaching profession in the interests of the public.
	It provides advice to government and other agencies on important issues that affect the quality of teaching and learning.
	It works with teachers to make sure its advice is based on practical experience and reliable research.
	It brings together teachers and other partners with an interest in the education service, including parents, governors and employers.
	(c) The staff complement is 206.
	 (iii)  Tribunals
	Currently, the Department is not responsible for any tribunals.

Dyslexia

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  what representations his Department has received on the proposal that at least one teacher in every school should have the nationally recognised specialist qualification accredited by the British Dyslexia Association for teachers to assess and support dyslexic children;
	(2)  what assessment his Department has made of the results of the Xtraordinary People No to Failure report on the rate of dyslexia specific learning difficulties among failing children; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  what provision his Department has made for  (a) training dyslexia specialists and  (b) specialist dyslexia teaching support within personalised learning plans;
	(4)  what provision has been made for specialist dyslexia teaching within the  (a) Every Child a Reader,  (b) Every Child a Writer and  (c) Every Child Counts programme;
	(5)  what assessment his Department has made of the efficacy of the reading recovery scheme for dyslexic children.

Kevin Brennan: We have received a number of representations that at least one teacher in every school should have a specialist dyslexia qualification.
	All local authorities and schools must have regard to the special educational needs code of practice which provides advice on their statutory duties to identify, assess and make provision for pupils' special educational needs. Children with dyslexia should have their needs identified and support put in place.
	To identify and promote best practice, we are working with dyslexia organisations on the No to Failure project, through which children in trailblazer schools are screened and specialist teaching provided to those identified at risk of dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties. We are supporting this project with just over £1 million funding over three years.
	The recently published report from No to Failure says a significant proportion of participating children not achieving expected levels of attainment are at risk of dyslexia or other specific learning difficulties. However, the report does not indicate how many had already been identified with SEN, nor does it evaluate the impact of specialist teaching on children's progression. We are looking forward to seeing the final report later this year, which we understand will contain such an evaluation.
	Through No to Failure, we have commissioned Dr. Chris Singleton to summarise published research on the impact of specialist dyslexia teaching. We will consider whether and how we should promote specialist dyslexia teaching as best practice in the light of evidence of its impact.
	All schools receive a school development grant which they are able to use to support improvements in any aspect of teaching and learning. This can include professional development for teachers intending to be dyslexia specialists. It is however for individual teachers and their schools to determine training and development needs and how best to address them. This would also hold true for support staff. Local authorities may retain a proportion of this grant, under certain conditions, to provide specific training and development in SEN.
	To help those working in schools with identifying and supporting children with dyslexia, last October we launched the Inclusion Development Programme, which is offering professional development in key areas of SEN starting with training on communication difficulties, including dyslexia. The Inclusion Development Programme materials were developed in close consultation with dyslexia organisations.
	Our commitment through the Primary and Secondary national strategies is to ensure Quality First teaching for all. The Every Child a Reader and Every Child Counts initiatives are focused on providing additional intervention for the 5 per cent. of children facing the most difficulties with reading and mathematics. They do not provide a specific focus on provision for children with dyslexia. Every Child a Reader is being rolled out to reach 30,000 children a year by 2010-11.
	Every Child Counts is currently in a research phase and will be informed by the Williams review of the teaching of mathematics that is due to be published in June this year. The intention is that Every Child Counts will be aimed at children whose attainment in the early stages of mathematics shows they are not making expected progress for their age.
	Every Child a Writer is a new programme announced at the end of last year. The intention—as stated in our Children's Plan—is that this will offer support later in primary school than Every Child a Reader and Every Child Counts and reach a greater number of pupils. Further announcements will be made about Every Child a Writer in due course.
	Evaluations of the Every Child a Reader pilot—which provides Reading Recovery for children from among those having the most difficulties in learning to read—were published in 2006 and 2007. These are available on
	www.everychildareader.org.uk.
	The evaluation of Every Child a Reader in London in 2005-06 showed that 87 per cent. of children who had received Reading Recovery were considered to have made average to exceptional progress in reading comprehension. However, these evaluations did not include looking at the efficacy of Reading Recovery for children with dyslexia.
	The SEN code of practice says that
	"effective management, school ethos and the learning environment, curricular, pastoral and discipline arrangements can help prevent some special educational needs arising, and minimise others" (paragraph 5:18).
	Where whole school arrangements for teaching and learning are not addressing a child's learning difficulties, schools have a statutory duty to do their best to ensure that the necessary provision is made for any pupil who has special educational needs. It follows that if a child with dyslexia is not benefiting from their participation in any or all of the three initiatives, the school must make additional or different arrangements to address the child's special educational needs.

General Certificate of Secondary Education

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of eligible pupils gained no A* to C graded GCSEs in 2007, broken down by  (a) multiple deprivation decile and  (b) local authority area.

Jim Knight: For statistics based on school location the available information can be found in the Statistical First Release 'GCSE and Equivalent Examination Results in England 2006/07' available at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000768/index.shtml.
	Within this Statistical First Release:
	(a) Table 21 shows the GCSE and equivalent achievement of pupils by the income deprivation affecting children index (IDACI) decile of the school location
	(b) Table 18 shows the GCSE and equivalent achievement of pupils by local authority area.
	Information on pupils gaining no A* to C graded GCSEs can only be provided at disproportionate cost.
	For statistics based on pupil residence, further information on GCSE and equivalent attainment of pupils by the IDACI decile can be found in the additional tables attached to the Statistical First Release 'National Curriculum Assessment, GCSE and Equivalent Attainment and Post-16 Attainment by Pupil Characteristics, in England 2006/07' available at:
	http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000759/index.shtml.

Specialised Diplomas: Finance

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what his latest estimate is of the cost to his Department of delivering the new diplomas in each year from 2008-09 to 2015-16; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Knight: We have invested £45 million in 2007-08 to training the workforce and supporting consortia across the country to deliver diplomas.
	In addition, in 2008-09 schools will receive approximately £1,000 per student doing diplomas in KS4, to reflect the additional costs of delivering these courses.
	Schools and colleges delivering diplomas post-16 will receive funding for their diploma students at rates set by the LSC funding methodology for 2008/09. The funding rates for diplomas paid to schools and colleges will vary by line and level of learning, the additional learning options chosen by the student, factors particular to the school or college in which it is delivered including disadvantage, area costs and success rates, and funding for additional support learners may need.
	An illustrative example of funding that a school sixth form would receive over two years for a student on a diploma, A level and Edexcel national diploma vocational programme respectively, and excluding institutional and individual learner factors, is shown as follows:
	
		
			   Funding (£) 
			 Advanced Diploma 89,143 
			 A levels (3 AS, 3 A2) 7,383 
			 Edexcel National Diploma 8,561 
		
	
	The full details of LSC funding rates are published at
	http://www.lsc.gov.uk/providers/funding-policy/strategic-overview.

Teaching Methods

Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of lessons in each school year were set in the latest period for which figures are available.[Official Report, 10 July 2008, Vol. 478, c. 11MC.]

Jim Knight: Ofsted collects data on the use of streaming and setting in lessons observed during inspections, the latest period for which their data indicate the proportion of lessons in each school year which are set by ability is 2002/03.
	
		
			 Lessons set as observed by Ofsted, 2002/03 
			  Percentage 
			 Year 7 28 
			 Year 8 38 
			 Year 9 43 
			 Key Stage 3 36 
			 Year 10 37 
			 Year 11 40 
			 Key Stage 4 39 
			 Overall Secondary 38 
		
	
	Until 2002/03, Ofsted recorded lessons observed during inspections as being set, streamed, mixed ability or otherwise organised. For clarity, 'setting' is the term used to describe the organisation of pupils in classes on the basis of their prior attainment in the particular subject being taught. The term 'banding', which is very similar to streaming, is used when the decision as to which pupils are included or not in a class is based on the prior attainment in a range of subjects.
	From 2003/04 the distinction between streaming and setting was removed and Ofsted now record data on whether classes they observe are mixed ability or set/streamed. They no longer record data on setting alone. It is therefore not possible to provide data on the proportion of lessons which are set for the period from 2003/04 onwards.

Rented Housing: Private Sector

Sally Keeble: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many households were living in private rented accommodation during each of the last three years.

Iain Wright: I have been asked to reply.
	Estimates of the number of households in England living in private rented accommodation in each of the last three years are:
	
		
			  Number of households in private rented accommodation  in England 
			 2005 2,385,000 
			 2006 2,488,000 
			 2007 2,595,000 
			 Source: Labour Force Survey 
		
	
	These figures were published by the Department in December 2007 in 'Survey of English Housing Preliminary Results: 2006-07'.

Water Charges: Churches

Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform 
	(1)  for what reasons exemptions and reliefs on water charges for churches and charities will be removed in 2010; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the effect on churches and charities of the removal of exemptions and reliefs on water charges in 2010; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  what representations he has received on the removal of exemptions and reliefs on water charges for churches and charities in 2010;
	(4)  what discussions he has had with (a) Ofwat, (b) the Consumer Council for Water and (c) other water industry representatives on the removal of exemptions and reliefs on water charges for churches and charities in 2010;
	(5)  if he will review the decision to remove exemptions and reliefs on water charges for churches and charities in 2010.

Phil Woolas: I have been asked to reply.
	In 2000 the Secretary of State issued guidance on matters to be taken into account by Ofwat, the industry's economic regulator, in agreeing companies' charges schemes, including charging non-household users that are not businesses. These include places of worship, community facilities, charities and voluntary bodies. The guidance stated that those making similar demands on a service should be charged on the same basis. It also made clear that where premises impose customer-related costs in line with or lower than those of typical households, they should be able to benefit from tariffs which reflect their small demand on the water system.
	Churches were traditionally zero rated under the rateable value system of charging, meaning that they did not have to pay surface water drainage (SWD) charges. However the replacement of rateable value charges for SWD with a site area based charge means that churches will be required to pay surface water drainage charges and will no longer benefit from the cross subsidy that resulted from the rateable value system.
	Ofwat reviewed companies' approaches to charging for SWD in 2003. In RD35/03, 'Surface water drainage-charging policy' (September 2003), Ofwat concluded that charging according to site area was the best method of charging for SWD. Ofwat recommended that water companies consider introducing site area-based charging for SWD-particularly for non-household customers where the process is simpler to implement. However Ofwat also noted that, given that set up and administration costs of introducing this method were considerable, and would vary depending on customer base, it was for individual companies to decide if the benefits of implementing site area SWD charging outweighed the costs.
	For sewerage customers served by United Utilities the site area based SWD charge was introduced in 2007-08 for new and substantially altered properties. In 2008-09 it is being introduced for all non-household properties, including churches. The move to site area charging will be phased in over three years to reduce the year-on-year impact on those customers who will see an increase in their charges.
	The most cost reflective way of charging non-household customers for SWD is by reference to the customer's site area, because the larger the site area, the more surface water will drain from it. SWD charges based on site area are only payable for areas which drain (directly or indirectly) into public sewers. Chargeable areas will be adjusted to take account of large grassy or gravelled areas, such as church yards or burial grounds that do not drain into a public sewer. Surface area based charging offers strong incentives to customers to reduce surface water drainage costs they impose on companies, for example by installing soakaways. Charges can therefore be mitigated by customers by installing such devices. The approach aligns with the Government's water strategy for fair, affordable and cost reflective water and sewerage charges which incentivise environmentally responsible behaviour.
	Companies are obliged under their licences to ensure that charges are neither unduly preferential or unduly discriminatory between groups of customers. Ofwat therefore considers that churches and other places of worship should be treated no differently to other non-household customers.
	Ofwat has held discussions with the Consumer Council for Water which supports the proposal for all companies to charge surface water drainage by site area.